[TadEareckson]

FYI: You're making Sam's decision to ban you from the SW Texas forum look better all the time.

Last I heard, Sam hadn't MADE a decision to ban me from SW Texas. You're complimenting yourself.

Actually, I think you're just trying to even the scores on anyone who has "disrespected" you in the past.

If you say so - fine.

You've done a lot of good analysis, but then you decimate your readership with insults and foul language.

Then people are quite free not to read me. But I'm not seeing the numbers dropping off all that much.

But according to your "byproduct" comment, maybe that's not even true.

I love the sport, I despise most of the people in it. What's your point?

Unfortunately, that's not a good basis for building a new national hang gliding association.

It was a pretty good basis for rebuilding West Germany starting in the middle of 1945.

But there aren't any that I'd rather see dead.

You still get to fly pretty much wherever you want, right?

Instead, I'd much prefer to convert them all into believers in fairness and openness and competence (that includes, Jack, and Davis, and David Jebb, and Brad Hall, and Lisa Tate, and Rich Hass).

For the ones I know on that list... Yeah, right. Good luck.

That's what I am working to build here, and I welcome anyone who shares those goals.

Earth to Bob... They DON'T.

By contrast, you don't want to convert the people you hate, you just want to see them hurt them somehow.

Didn't you used to have a job in which you trained to kill people the US government wanted out of the way of various oil fields?

Tad, revenge is the easy road...

I wish.

...and it's the road to mutual assured destruction.

As long as it's mutual. That's better than nothing.

If we want to build a better hang gliding association we'll have to get past the hate and focus on simply doing things better.

If I watch less television I'll probably have time to do both.

Your ideas on towing could be part of that.

Right - "MY" ideas.

But your hatred can't.

Is that in the bylaws somewhere?

Please think about which of the two is your higher priority and focus on that.

Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays I'll do hate. Tuesdays and Thursdays I'll do hate and try to work in a little positive stuff. Lemme think a bit about the weekends.

[Bob Kuczewski]

I'm sorry, but when I'm standing at launch with only one guy on the nose wires (and I'm looking right at him), I will have far fewer human failure modes than any towing system.

1. 'Cept you don't have anyone on your sidewires and if a wing gets away from you your a** can be upside down in less time than it takes to read the rest of this sentence.

If I don't think I can control the glider with just one person on the nose wires, then I generally don't fly. I was at Torrey (maybe a year ago?) and I was helping a newer H4 launch. I asked if he wanted me on the nose, and he said he'd rather have me on his left wing. So I complied reluctantly. I was holding the wire loosely when the right wing started to lift and move out toward the lift band. He began yelling for me to hold him back. I wanted to push the left wing out to get it flying, but I followed his commands and held onto the wire. His right wing continued to lift, and in a split second he flew a tight left turn around me and "landed" downwind on the grass. Fortunately, he only did minor damage to the glider and none to himself. I think he would have been able to control the glider if I had been on his nose wires.

Generally speaking, a plane with a pilot and navigator in the cockpit is gonna be safer than a plane with just a pilot.

That's a poor analogy because the navigator is more of a redundant element than someone controlling an entirely separate aircraft or a winch. When you add another element "in parallel" you generally improve reliability (navigator or co-pilot examples). When you add another element "in series" you generally degrade reliability (such as adding another aircraft or a winch).

But rather than speculating, it might be better if we just had some actual accident data. Do you have any?

[Bob Kuczewski]

FYI: You're making Sam's decision to ban you from the SW Texas forum look better all the time.

Last I heard, Sam hadn't MADE a decision to ban me from SW Texas. You're complimenting yourself.

I've checked with Sam and he has confirmed it. Sam is trying to grow a club. From what I can tell, you just want to slam anyone who you feel is "disrespectful" to you. You've had a burr in your butt about Sam ever since he made some minor comments that you didn't like. Again, I think your ego is more important to you than either hang gliding or saving lives. Prove me wrong and try to work with Sam and his club. They're towing and they could use your expertise. You'll catch more bees with honey than vinegar.

Just my 2 cents.

[ZackC]

The other Bob was Bob Fisher. He voted to ban me from the Houston forum about nine and a half months later.

Tad, how do you know that? The vote was anonymous. I don't even know how Bob voted. He said (off-line) that he filtered your emails as a personal choice but didn't want to impose that choice on others, so I suspect if anything he voted to keep you.

Zack

[TadEareckson]

Bob Fisher - 2010/11/06

I guess i don't care becuase his emails autodelete when they reach my Inbox.

I stand corrected. I've been so overloaded by correspondence lately that I've been going blind and making mistakes. I confused him with Bobb Loper who publicly stated his intent to vote for a ban three hours prior to Bob's post. Thanks much for yet another catch and apologies to Bob With One b.

P.S. That vote shouldn't have been anonymous (or taken place to begin with). An anonymous vote FOR one of several individual candidates for an office - by all means. A vote to silence and ostracize someone who that individual doesn't hafta listen to but other people want (or even don't want) to hear...

[Bob Kuczewski]

P.S. That vote shouldn't have been anonymous (or taken place to begin with). An anonymous vote FOR one of several individual candidates for an office - by all means. A vote to silence and ostracize someone who that individual doesn't hafta listen to but other people want (or even don't want) to hear...

       

You're absolutely right about this Tad. In fact, I think that should be a "fundamental principle" in our organization. That's one of the things that I never liked about the "Bury" button on hanggliding.org. It allowed people to anonymously silence (or at least bury) the comments of others without taking responsibility for that action. I think if one person is going to take away or diminish the speech of another, they ought to have the decency to stand publicly behind that action.

[Bill Cummings]

I have to edit this post: I was on a parallel thread and Al still seems to be alive and kicking on the OZ report! My bad

[ZackC]

Yeah, we have three Bobs in HHPA...it can get confusing.

The vote was purely me caving in to the mob to keep the club from imploding (as ridiculous as that sounds). There was nothing right about it.

Zack

[TadEareckson]

Bob,

If I don't think I can control the glider with just one person on the nose wires, then I generally don't fly.

Then I can think of a lot of really good days at McConnellsburg when lotsa other people would've been DE LIGHTED to have you as part of their four to seven man crews.

I was at Torrey (maybe a year ago?) and I was helping a newer H4 launch. I asked if he wanted me on the nose, and he said he'd rather have me on his left wing.

Was there NOBODY within hollerin' distance who could've been pressed into service on the right wing?

So I complied reluctantly.

So you KNEW this wasn't a great idea. Are you SURE there was no one around for the right wing?

I was holding the wire loosely when the right wing started to lift and move out toward the lift band. He began yelling for me to hold him back. I wanted to push the left wing out to get it flying, but I followed his commands and held onto the wire.

GREAT! 'Cause the most important issue is that the word of the Pilot In Command is Sacred! Just like at Tenerife.

His right wing continued to lift, and in a split second he flew a tight left turn around me and "landed" downwind on the grass.

Whoa! Who coulda seen THAT coming!

Fortunately...

Meaning he COULD have broken his freakin' neck, right?

...he only did minor damage to the glider and none to himself.

After you did the worst possible thing you could have in that situation? Can't ask for any better than that.

I think he would have been able to control the glider if I had been on his nose wires.

1. Do you think he would have been able to control the glider if you had pushed the left wing out to get it flying?

2. Do you think he would have been in worse shape if you had just let go and walked away?

3. You just THINK he would have been able to control the glider if you had been on his nose wires. How well do you think he would have been able to control the glider if there had been people on both sidewires (and nowhere else)?

4. If you had been on Bill Priday's nose at Whitwell on 2005/10/01 and noticed that his hang strap was empty a quarter second after he said "Clear." would you have complied with the decision of the Pilot In Command?

5. What's the difference between the two situations?

That's a poor analogy because the navigator is more of a redundant element than someone controlling an entirely separate aircraft or a winch. When you add another element "in parallel" you generally improve reliability (navigator or co-pilot examples). When you add another element "in series" you generally degrade reliability (such as adding another aircraft or a winch).

1. Let's make the winch a platform launch winch - so I can take Mike Robertson out of the equation - and the entirely separate aircraft a Dragonfly.

2. Assuming the Dragonfly driver isn't a total douchebag with an itchy trigger finger and a really safe weak link on his end, the probability is EASILY 99.9 percent that I will be going UP in either environment.

3. The probability that I will crash while going up is roughly 0.0000000 percent.

4. From ten feet off the surface without the winch or Dragonfly the probability that I will be going down is roughly 100.0000000 percent.

5. The vast majority of bad things that happen to hang gliders only occur when they finish going down.

6. The fact that with a Dragonfly there's another aircraft involved is a concern pretty much only for the person flying the Dragonfly. I don't really care all that much what's at the other end of the string. All I need to worry about is that the string is tensioned and pulling forward. If there's a weld failure of a aileron activator crank that's almost never gonna be a big problem for me (and there aren't a whole lot of Dragonfly drivers that I'm gonna get too choked up about).

But rather than speculating, it might be better if we just had some actual accident data. Do you have any?

We don't have actual accident data in this sport. We have whatever information leaks out despite the best efforts of the instructors, clubs, site managers, flight park operators, and national organization. But if we keep our eyes, ears, noses, and brains open we can get a pretty good idea that we're gonna mangle and kill a lot more people after fifty thousand ramp launched flights at McConnellsburg than we are after fifty thousand dolly launched Dragonfly tows at pancake flat, wide open, and closely mown Ridgely Airpark.

Or think about fifty thousand flights at Torrey Pines if that works better for ya.

[Pilgrim]

"(and there aren't a whole lot of Dragonfly drivers that I'm gonna get too choked up about)."

I think this pretty much sums things up. What kind of person thinks like this? Absolutely no one I would ever respect, honor or have anything to do with. What a looser. This attitude alone undoes every single thing that guy ever tried to do that was worh while. So what do you have left? Worthlessness with worthless advice. Un f'_cking believable.

Pilgrim

PS: I apologize in advance to the other folks on this site for the 14 page rant that is to come trying to rationalize this unbelievable statement. Good luck because I will not be buying that crap. HHPA was right on to dump this guy. He ain't no good for anything but screwing the pooch.